The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Court of International Trade ruling in Trek Leather that said corporate officers can be liable for negligent misstatements on entry documentation in a Sept. 16 decision. The ruling marks an apparent change of heart for the CAFC, which reviewed the question of corporate officer liability in the case as part of an en banc rehearing (see 14030601). The Appeals Court previously ruled against the CIT and found that Trek Leather's owner, Harish Shadadpuri, was not liable for his company’s undervaluation of entries of men’s suits (see 13073025). Customs lawyers said the case should be the source of serious concern for corporate compliance executives who may face new risk as a result of the finding.
Hours of debate on net neutrality rules at two FCC workshops Tuesday quickly veered into the issue of paid prioritization, a subsidiary issue the commission has committed to examine as it develops broader rules. FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler opened the workshops, saying he hoped they would “put a fine point” on the more than 3 million net neutrality comments filed.
The FCC could address concerns about “fast lanes” by prohibiting non-user directed paid prioritization through Communications Act Section 706, Jim Cicconi, AT&T senior executive vice president-external and legislative affairs, and Bob Quinn, senior vice president-federal regulatory, told FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s Chief of Staff Ruth Milkman and General Counsel Jonathan Sallet Thursday, said an ex parte notice filed in docket 14-28 Friday. Arrangements between ISPs and edge providers for other services would be subject to a multifactor test under a “commercial reasonableness” standard, AT&T said. ISPs “would be able to engage in individualized negotiations with edge providers for a host of services, while prohibiting the precise practice that has raised ‘fast lane’ concerns,” it said. The telco said it believes the framework would stand up in court.
Whether to repeal or maintain consent decrees loomed large in the second round of music licensing comments filed to the Copyright Office last week (http://1.usa.gov/1tIPlqs). Early copies of the comments, due Friday, were provided by broadcasters and artist attorneys and advocates. Music attorneys foresaw the eventual elimination of Copyright Act Section 115 in favor of direct deals, but the Future of Music Coalition (FMC) doubted whether such deals would be helpful to artists.
It’s murky just who is bankrolling the efforts by national advocacy groups to generate hundreds of thousands of comments to the FCC in the net neutrality debate.
Just who is bankrolling the efforts by national advocacy groups (WID Sept. 11 p1) to generate hundreds of thousands of comments to the FCC in the net neutrality debate is murky. Phil Kerpen, president of free-market American Commitment, which said this week it’s countering the mobilization efforts of pro-Title II groups, declined to say where the organization gets its funding. Two of the pro-Title II groups that organized Wednesday’s Internet slowdown protest disclosed to us their major donors, but neither fully made its funders public. Two other protest organizers would not say how their efforts are being funded.
Whether to repeal or maintain consent decrees loomed large in the second round of music licensing comments filed to the Copyright Office last week (http://1.usa.gov/1tIPlqs). Early copies of the comments, due Friday, were provided by broadcasters and artist attorneys and advocates. Music attorneys foresaw the eventual elimination of Copyright Act Section 115 in favor of direct deals, but the Future of Music Coalition (FMC) doubted whether such deals would be helpful to artists.
Just who is bankrolling the efforts by national advocacy groups (CD Sept 11 p10) to generate hundreds of thousands of comments to the FCC in the net neutrality debate is murky. Phil Kerpen, president of free-market American Commitment, which said this week it’s countering the mobilization efforts of pro-Title II groups, declined to say where the organization gets its funding. Two of the pro-Title II groups that organized Wednesday’s Internet slowdown protest disclosed to us their major donors, but neither fully made its funders public. Two other protest organizers wouldn’t say how their efforts are being funded.
The California Public Utilities Commission put on hold Thursday plans to submit reply comments to the FCC supporting its net neutrality Title II NPRM. The decision came on a vote to overturn an earlier 3-2 decision to submit comments urging the commission to reclassify broadband as a Communications Act Title II service and use that authority in conjunction with other authorities as jurisdiction bases for new net neutrality rules. Commissioner Carla Peterman, who had originally voted in favor of reclassification, decided later in the meeting to officially abstain, tying the vote 2-2. The tied vote means any comments are on hold, a CPUC spokeswoman said. Commissioners Mike Florio and Catherine Sandoval had voted in favor of the staff’s set of recommendations, while Commission President Michael Peevey and Commissioner Michael Picker voted against them.
The California Public Utilities Commission put on hold Thursday plans to submit reply comments to the FCC supporting its net neutrality Title II NPRM. The decision came on a vote to overturn an earlier 3-2 decision to submit comments urging the commission to reclassify broadband as a Communications Act Title II service and use that authority in conjunction with other authorities as jurisdiction bases for new net neutrality rules. Commissioner Carla Peterman, who had originally voted in favor of reclassification, decided later in the meeting to officially abstain, tying the vote 2-2. The tied vote means any comments are on hold, a CPUC spokeswoman said. Commissioners Mike Florio and Catherine Sandoval had voted in favor of the staff’s set of recommendations, while Commission President Michael Peevey and Commissioner Michael Picker voted against them.